6th Annual Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Student Essay Contest

2012 MLK Student Essay Contest Winners

left to right – Allyson Dodson, 2nd place winner (College of Nursing), Andres Rodriquez, 1st place winner (College of Medicine) and Raena Hariharan, 3rd place winner (College of Medicine)

First Place - P. Andres Rodriguez (COM 3rd Year student)
Second Place -  Allyson Dodson (CON 1st Year, BSN)
Third Place - Raena Hariharan (COM 1st Year student)

Winning Essay

Andres Rodriguez (College of Medicine)

"All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem."

We live in an age of incredible progress and achievement.  But still we have wars, still we suffer from preventable deaths, and still we continue to find new and untreatable diseases.  It seems no matter how far we come, we still have so far to go; and this is exactly what Dr. King means to highlight in his speech.

Although Dr. King’s message was once aimed at the progress he so strongly strove for and gained, in respect to social and racial equality, his insight is profound enough to guide us in every other aspect of human achievement.  As we advance our society through improvements in medicine, technology, transportation, energy sources, etc. we must always remember that our work will never be done.  There will always be a new challenge looming in the distance.  With this in mind, our only preparation as we progress as a society cannot be in our advancements and inventions alone, for they, themselves, are certain to become obsolete.  No, progress will not protect us from the future, for progress is always halted by the future’s uncertainty.  Rather, to prepare we must instill in ourselves the values and correct motivations in order to handle what we cannot yet expect.  We need to ask ourselves what we view as the “big picture”.  Alone, an abstract accepted to an acclaimed journal for an improved CV will not give society a step ahead in the battle against cancer, just as winning an election does no good for the jobless and hungry.  But the process of discovering proteins that can be targeted by therapy and the eventual drug development and revision, although a time consuming process, does lead to true progress.  Being elected based upon a set of goals and ideals alone will serve no one.  Working hard to achieve them at the cost of political and monetary support and with the risk of no future election; this will result in progress that lives on beyond one political term. 

Dr. King speaks from experience.  He fought to change the result of progress built on a weak foundation.  Earlier in his speech, Dr. King mentions that problem after problem will continue to face humanity because, “the Kingdom of God as a universal reality is not yet.”  Although it is a religious reference, its implication of a time of perfection and an absence of evil is very obvious.  Throughout human history, it is apparent that man is capable of much evil, and now, as the possibility of evil persists there is no true certainty except variability.  This is why our progress rests in the hands of chance.  No matter what we do, we can never predict what any one man will do.  As we develop new drugs to combat illness, our fate rests in the hands of corporations to decide whether or not it is profitable to produce these new advances.  As dictatorships and political tyrants are ousted from their seats of power, the futures of nations depend on what the victorious coup and regime leader will decide.  Even in the struggle of equality after slavery was abolished, the fate of African Americans across the country was decided on streets of individual towns rather than in the halls of the Senate.  We are not at risk because of our advances themselves but because of the potential for complacency and abandonment that success can instill in an evolving atmosphere.

But how can we then hedge our progress to protect it from the next failure?  Unfortunately, that option is all but lost for our current leaders and mentors.  They have already made their decision.  For better or for worse, they have already chosen either the success of themselves, or they have sacrificed individual greatness for the sustenance of our human union.  And here we are.  It is easy to view the given passage as a warning, a “get out while you can” message declaring progress futile and failure inevitable.  But it is much more inspiring and encouraging to view Dr. King’s words as a lesson and further more a beckoning creed for the young and upcoming leadership of humanity. 

First, remember that the future will never stop coming.  As Dr. King also says in his speech, we must be aware that not “all evil lies dead upon the seashore”.  Instead of a threat, this is a seal of the permanence of his and our mission.  Complacency is the catalyst to the precariousness of our future, and is the seed of being unprepared and unfruitful.  But this can be solved by one commonly overlooked and underrepresented ideal: the goal of our progress lies in those it helps and not in those who achieve it.  We must lead with the goal of service towards others rather than towards the satisfaction of serving ourselves, and in this way we will never see an end to the task at hand. 

It is equally important to identify the purpose of our progress.  As mentioned before, the progress of humanity is a neutral entity; it neither signals failure or success, rather it is solely the evidence of change.  The meaning of our progress is a product of the risk of human freedom.  Success depends on the reason for the change.  If a road is built to ensure votes and financial backing, it will not be taken care of by the future candidate who has no stock in its benefactors.  But if a bridge is built to unite a community, then it will ideally be maintained and the advancement will be meaningful and lasting.  In the same way, a church group sending money to a distant village solely for the claim of social beneficence means much less than a group of teenagers raising money for dinners for the local homeless.  The difference is not in the actions, but rather in the motivation.  The church may grow bigger and richer and the elected official may become appointed, but progress has stopped at the individual level; whereas progress made for the good of others results in a strengthening of community and a reestablishment of human solidarity, both of which hold better resistance towards antagonism than individual effort.   As we see chance influencing our impact on the world, it always depends on human choice. 

And yet we must maintain the hope instilled in us by Dr. King and make the game of chance a game of percentages.  Dr. King knew the good nature of people and the ability of humanity’s goodness to spread like fire in those who saw and heard its effects.  Now our leaders are displaying examples of greed, self-service, and instant gratification with no thought to what may come next.  It is up to us to now make the decisions and influence those after us.  In our efforts we must choose to pursue progress that we will maintain and follow through with, rather than an idea that looks good on paper.  When we strive for change, we must do so for the improvement of ourselves and others rather than the benefit of ourselves alone.  In this way we will start a change that can be believed in by those after us and continued with shared values to protect against future adversity.

Second Place

Precarious Progress: A Consideration of Healthcare Issues and Cautiously Optimistic Solutions to Solve Them

Allyson Dodson (College of Nursing)

“All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem.” It’s easy to hear these words and get discouraged, or inspired, depending on which side of the issue you might fall on any given day. At face value, it is a given that with every solution, it is only a solution to part of the problem, or for only a portion of those affected by said problem. As Margaret Atwood (1985) eloquently wrote in the voice of one of her characters, “better never means better for everyone…It always means worse for some.”

As far as its relation to healthcare, it must be considered where progress is needed. The cost of healthcare is astronomical, and thus is a concern to individuals from all economic backgrounds. One devastating disease could bankrupt anyone, really. President Obama has attempted to mandate universal healthcare coverage, which is great from the perspective of healthcare providers and every health conscious individual.  However, the concerns for providing it are great. Who will pay for it? Employer provided plans are often expensive, especially for families. Government funded programs are likely to only benefit those from lower economic status, while the middle class must shoulder most of the burden of cost and likely have to seek their coverage from other sources.

The United States struggles to pay for Medicare as it stands currently, and with individuals living longer, it is only a matter of time before this program, among others, is bankrupt. Of course, taxes could be raised, but how likely will it be that US citizens will support that? Dr. Arthur Garson (2000) of the American College of Cardiology suggests creating regional health insurance agencies that offer a variety of plans to choose from, having employers contribute a fee per employee to the agency for the employed, and government subsidies could be provided per individual based on income and economic status. Then, each person would be allowed to select their plan of choice, and pay for additional benefits as needed/desired in addition to the basic coverage plan. For instance, supplemental prescription coverage could be offered at an additional affordable fee. Also, a system where consumers are rewarded for health promotion behaviors, such as maintaining a healthy BMI, not smoking and managing non-modifiable health conditions effectively would be incentive to inspire a healthy society; if one’s financial health depends upon his or her behavior, diet, exercise and/or drug regimens prescribed by doctors may be taken as more than just a polite suggestion.

This system could work. But, should government be able to mandate coverage in the first place? Many individuals think that having health insurance coverage or not should be a choice that lies with the individual alone, but that brings the problem full circle back to the affordability of it all. Some might argue that this is discrimination. However, mandating car insurance in order to drive, as well as rewarding good behavior with discounts and “punishing” bad behavior with increased premiums, has worked well in the auto insurance industry. The difference between an auto and a health insurance requirement may lie in that health or lack thereof is something that applies to all, whether we like it or not, whereas driving is a privilege, a choice. The Supreme Court will be reviewing the legislature in March 2012. Hopefully soon after, specific guidelines can direct the redesign of a healthcare system that will meet the needs of all of the people of the United States.  

As a future healthcare provider, I specifically worry for individuals with chronic health issues. Of greatest concern is obesity, as approximately one-third of the United States population is obese, and its often subsequent issues such as heart disease, type II diabetes, and infertility. Healthcare facilities must be outfitted with equipment capable of handling the morbidly obese, and their staff must have a strong educational background in management of heart disease and diabetes. The cost of cardiac drugs and insulin must be managed and supplies well stocked. Currently, some of the drugs to treat heart conditions and diabetes are on the FDA drug shortage list, (Federal Drug Administration, 2011). However, most of the above conditions as well as others are preventable- if we had a system that rewarded healthy behavior, this could allow healthcare providers to focus our attention on encouraging and providing health promotion through screening, education clinics and wellness check-ups. A healthier society will mean that individuals will live longer, and healthcare personnel will need a thorough education in geriatric care. A healthier, older population will also require additional home care personnel as well as more assisted living facilities and nursing homes.

With every concern in health care, there are multiple solutions and each carries its share of benefits and additional problems. Who should be making the decisions is one of the biggest concerns at the present time, equal in magnitude to who should pay and how. For now, we must hope for guidance from the Supreme Court of the United States, promote the side of the argument most important to us with our votes and volunteering, and provide the best level of care at the bedside day to day with skill, encouragement and compassion. It is the one on one healthcare provider/patient relationship which will ultimately make the most impact on an individual’s life, and as healthcare providers, this we can control today.

Third Place

Raena Hariharan (College of Medicine)

“All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem.”

With grace and insight, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. made these reflections about the progress of change in society. He urges us to stray away from being satisfied with results as there is always another problem that lies ahead. All progress sits upon a shaky pedestal set to topple at any moment to remind us that there is more to be done. This idea relates to the mission of health care professionals and biomedical research scientists.

As we continue to make improvements in the field of medicine and health care, it is of the utmost importance that we do not become complacent in our endeavor. It is an ongoing task and with every triumph, a new opportunity to improve presents itself. Part of being a health care professional is to never be satisfied with your result and to continually question every practice.

The history of Robert Koch’s discovery of tuberculosis bacilli provides one poignant example of the importance of Dr. King’s message. Prior to the nineteenth century, it was believed that some diseases were transmitted by a contagion from person to person due to emanations from the bodies of the sick and contaminated air. Robert Koch (1843-1910), a medical scientist, developed his own techniques for studying pathogens which led him to the discovery of tuberculosis bacilli. In 1884, Koch wrote a paper on his findings called The Etiology of Tuberculosis. After several experimental studies of the occurrence of tuberculosis bacilli in tuberculosis, Koch concludes that the bacilli are the cause of the disease as they occur regularly coupled with their appearance in connection to pathological changes of disease. In the late nineteenth century, clinicians were skeptical about the value of microbes and many were resistant to this idea as the cause of disease. They felt that it would cost them money and clients. Koch stressed the need for prevention and he felt that “Prophylaxis must include both the direct destruction of bacilli through disinfection, and efforts to protect healthy persons from contamination” (150). In general, clinicians feared that they would become obsolete with this new discovery of germs. Many were also critical of the disinfection and registration practices that followed as it branded the sick publicly. Koch realized this limitation and knew that “because of the wide distribution of this disease, one will have to consider the social ramifications of all the steps that could be taken against it. One will need to weigh carefully how far one may go in these directions without compromising the advantages by unavoidable disturbances and disadvantages” (150). Despite pushback from his peers in the medical community, Koch continued to study pathogenic microorganisms. As a research scientist, Koch continually questioned scientific knowledge and medical practices. Koch’s discovery of the germ as the cause of disease had a major impact on both the medical and public society and revolutionized how disease was viewed. The example of Koch and his ability to strive to learn more, find new approaches and discover the how and why of change in medical practices is an example that we should all follow.

Only with rigorous and continuous inquisition, will the medical field evolve. Dr. King did acknowledge the importance of each small victory as a signal to stay optimistic about a cause. New developments or changing conditions will always affect a previous solution and thus, the importance of non-complacency reveals itself. Dr. King understood the difficulties of societal transformation and knew the importance of investigating the how and why to a solution. In order to be a successful advocate, it is critical not fall into a lull of complacency or be content with a single success.

Our world is in constant flux. Stay aware of your quest, celebrate your triumphs and always known that your crusade to improve is never finished.

Members of the MUSC Gospel choir rendered two selections during the 5th Annual Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Student Essay Presentation and Commemorative Program.

Contact Webmaster
  

 
 
 

search MUSC in the App Store